International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)
e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 08 | Aug 2019
p-ISSN: 2395-0072
www.irjet.net
Evaluating Cost-Effective Railway Level Crossing Protection Systems
Ms. Madhura J. Joshi1, Prof. D. B. Desai2
1PG
Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Dr. J. J. Magdum College of Engineering, Jaysingpur, Maharashtra,
India
2Assistant Prof., Department of Civil Engineering, Dr. J. J. Magdum College of Engineering, Jaysingpur,
Maharashtra, India
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------Abstract - Improving safety at railway level crossings (RLX) is costly and funds are always limited, it is important to search for
cost-effective alternative solutions. There are low-cost innovative RLX-protection systems available worldwide with opportunities
for application in Australia, subject to their effectiveness and appropriateness. To date, there is no systematic approach available in
Australia to evaluating those systems. This paper sets out a methodology to identify and evaluate suitable technologies in relation
to their adoption and adaptation to conditions.
1. INTRODUCTION
Railway safety is a crucial aspect of rail operation the world over. Malfunctions resulting in accidents usually get wide media
coverage even when the railway is not at fault and give to rail transport, among the uninformed public, an undeserved image of
inefficiency often fuelling calls for immediate reforms. Rail/road intersections are very unique, special, potentially dangerous
and yet unavoidable in the world. Here two different entities with entirely different responsibilities, domains, performances
come together and converge for a single cause of providing a facility to the road user. During the normal operation also, there is
every possibility of accidents occurring even with very little negligence in procedure and the result is of very high risk. The
potential for accidents is made higher as the railways control only half the problem. The other half, meanwhile, cannot really be
said to be controlled by one entity, as even though traffic rules and road design standards supposedly exist, the movements of
road users are not organized and monitored by one specific entity as rigidly as rail movements.A very high number of these
collisions are caused by the negligence, incompetence or incapacity of road vehicle drivers, who by and large operate their
vehicles in environments in which safety consciousness is practically non-existent.
Since it is the railway, which must bear the responsibility for ensuring that road users protect it from the transgressions
(despite the fact that in many countries the law gives it priority of passage over road users), it is the railway which also has to
shoulder most of the financial burden of providing this protection.
Similarly, it is the railway, which has most of the responsibility for educating road users on the safe use of its cost effective
system for railway level crossing protection appears that in many regions, railways are ill-equipped to be in a position to
monitor level crossing safety effectively and to take both corrective and pro-active measures to improve the safety of their level
crossing installations. Railway is an eco-friendly and popular mode of transport in major cities of the world. Train accidents
occur normally due to safety violations resulting from human errors or limitations and equipment failures loosing precious
lives. The Ministry of Railways (Railway Board), Govt. of India has referred many collisions in the past few years and therefore
need for research is very important in this field.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 A.J. Powderham and G. J. Tamaro [1995],
Settlements occurring during the first phase of tunnelling for the extension of the Docklands Light Railway in London caused
concern for damage to the Mansion House during subsequent phases of the work. The building is a landmark structure and no
further damage could be accepted. Tunnelling was halted until a satisfactory protection program was in place. Various means of
protecting the structure were investigated, ranging from full structural underpinning to a least-risk methodology based on the
observational method. This paper describes the background to the development and implementation of the observational
method to successfully protect the building and complete construction. This required appropriate contingency measures to be
identified and planned. Of the contingencies involving preventive or strengthening works, a system of structural ties through
the building was selected as most appropriate, least risky, and most economical. Trigger levels for building response were
established. Extensive instrumentation was installed and the building was fully monitored during the subsequent phases of
tunneling.
© 2019, IRJET
|
Impact Factor value: 7.34
|
ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal
|
Page 1335
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)
e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 08 | Aug 2019
p-ISSN: 2395-0072
www.irjet.net
2.2 Yeboah Gyasi-Agyei [2004],
An advanced technology cost-effective drip irrigation system design and setup on environmentally sensitive elevated steep
slopes ~batters! Of a coal train derailment site in Central Queensland, Australia, are presented. The final profile of the coal
burial site consists of six batters and associated berms with a drop in elevation of about 35 m. A small dam constructed
downstream of the confluence of the two main drainage channels at the site supplied water for irrigation of the batters to aid
the establishment of grass to control erosion. Water was periodically pumped from the small dam to three storage tanks using a
petrol (gas) pump. Three solar pumps drew water from the storage tanks and dam to irrigate the top four batters. Contactors,
pressure switches and irrigation control valves in turn shared a single solar power source between the solar pumps. Level balls
(floating switches) placed in the storage tanks cut the solar power supply to the pumps when the storage tanks were nearly
empty. On the whole, the irrigation system worked very well and excellent grass cover was established within 12 weeks. Given
the environmental risks associated with the on-site burying of coal and the estimated cost of about AU $11.73/m2 (every 10
years) in maintenance if the railway batters are not treated, the estimated total cost of AU$4.61/m2 of batter area treated with
irrigation, including AU$3.08/m2 in irrigation cost, is justified.
2.3 Alfred E. Fazio [2004],
Light rail transit (LRT) offers the widest range of opportunities to the design community in applications engineering. There
are certainly more varied possibilities in the design and configuration of LRT than in that of rail rapid transit or commuter rail.
Consequently, it is particularly important to understand the relationship between applications design and railway operations
when deploying light rail. The development of a new rail system should begin with a clearly stated operational requirements
document and then evolve to a comprehensive, systems-level design. This evolution must be supported by an active systems
integration process. Examples of this approach are taken from the deployment of the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail, a highperformance light rail transit system located in northern New Jersey that is currently in deployment through a design, build,
operate, and maintain contract.
3. LEVEL CROSSING SAFETY IN INDIA
The Indian Railway network with a route length of 62,495 km has a total of 40,445 level crossings, or an average of one every
1.5 kilometre. Of this total, 16,132 crossings are some form of barrier protection facing road users, 20,528 are open crossings
with fixed road warning signs, 948 are road crossings adjacent to canals without barrier protection, and with the warning of
road warning signs, and 2,837.
In 1997/98, level crossing accidents constituted 65 out of 420 the accidents (or 15 percent) of all types in the indian railway
network. However, in the same year, level crossing accidents accounted for 42 percent (134 individuals) of all fatalities and 18
percent (179 persons) accidents on the network. In one year surveyed, 80 percent of all level crossing accidents occurred
crossings which were unmanned Indian Railways has recently crossing to the effect that the decision has taken Number of
unmanned gates with a high level of usage by road and / or rail and not to Unmanned operation.
4. LEVEL CROSSING SAFETY INITIATIVES
a) Manning Of Unprotected Level Crossings
The current five-year plan (covering the period 1999/2000 to 2003/2004) provides for the progressive conversion of
unmanned &unprotected crossings to manned &protected status. Depending upon the assigned category of each crossing, this
will involve installation of warning signs or lights and boom barriers of various types as well as construction of a crossing
attendant's workstation at prioritized locations.
b) Other Level Crossing Upgrading Measures
In addition to conversion of unprotected level crossings to manned status, the Indian Railways has a plan to grade separate
or to relay interlock some of the more densely trafficked crossings on its network.
c) Road User Education
The Indian Railways has only a very small budget for road user education but does make use of the mass media (mainly
television and newspapers) to promote public awareness of the need for caution when using level crossings. One effective
means of disseminating this message is the use of notice boards in punjayat (or local village) offices to display safety posters.
Since residents of rural areas tend to regularly visit their punjayat offices, this initiative has the potential to reach a wide
section of the community. One such poster used to promote caution by the public when using level crossing is shown hereafter.
© 2019, IRJET
|
Impact Factor value: 7.34
|
ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal
|
Page 1336
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)
e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 08 | Aug 2019
p-ISSN: 2395-0072
www.irjet.net
d) Level Crossing Safety Impediments
Apart from a lack of adequate capital funds to upgrade level crossings, the main factors considered to be working against an
improvement in level crossing safety in India are:

The lack of priority

The lack of funding priority

Increasing disposable incomes and motorization

The predominance of Absolute Block and Tablet systems of safe working
5. ADVANCED SYSTEMS FOR LEVEL CROSSING PROTECTION
Systems likely to be available in future for the protection of level crossings are of types:
5.1 Advanced Radio-Based Train Control System – General Features
The American and Canadian Railway Associations began to study Advanced Train Control Systems (ATCS) in 1984. The
systems then investigated involved the use of radio, satellite and radar communications. Following the lengthy appraisal of this
technology, it will at last enter operational service with San Francisco's Bay Area Rapid Transit System (BART) in 2001.
Application of ATCS will allow elimination of track circuits and signals and in future will facilitate high density and unmanned
train operations.
5.2 ATCS - Level Crossing Safety Features
Existing level crossing systems represent a weak point of safety management and control on railways. Adequate warning
time is needed for safe level crossing operation. Existing systems having electronic train detectors work on the basis of short
track circuits installed in the track approaches on either side of level crossings. These systems control the beginning and end of
the warning indication. The disadvantage of this system is that the warning interval becomes disproportionately long with slow
trains, because maximum train speeds normally determine the interval between the beginning and end points of track circuited
sections, and thus a train operating at slow speed will take significantly longer to pass between these two points.
5.3 ATCS – Financial Benefits
The functions of CTC and ATC are added easily to the system for a relatively low additional cost. Indeed, the addition of CTC
or ATC is estimated to comprise less than 50 per cent of the total system installation cost.
An automatic level crossing warning/protection system based on conventional track circuiting is estimated to cost US$
45,000 per level crossing in Japan. By contrast, the cost of a BART-style ATCS 23 is estimated to cost only about US$22,000 per
level crossing.
5.4 GPS-based Advanced Train Control System
Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) communications systems are now in common use for sea, air and land transport navigation
applications. GPS uses communications links with number of satellites to establish the navigation coordinates of aircraft or
surface transport receivers. GPS systems are on the whole very inexpensive – a receiver for an automobile now costing as little
as US$ 500
6. ALTERNATIVES SYSTEM
O’’ Conner System - This system uses solar powered microwave radar sensors to detect the location, speed and direction of
approaching trains up to 3 km away and activate the warning device when the train is 25 seconds away. A solar-powered LED
“X” sign would be located near the crossing and interfaced to the level crossing protection system.
Solar Powered Railway Level Crossing Radio Warning System (SOLAGARDTM) - This system allows both audio and
visual warning at a crossing. An electro-magnetic track device detects an approaching train (2-5 kms from the crossing) and
actuates a solar powered VHF transmitter located about 3-4 kms from the level crossing. Through VHF Radio Communication
Link, the transmitter sends a coded radio signal towards the level crossing.
© 2019, IRJET
|
Impact Factor value: 7.34
|
ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal
|
Page 1337
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)
e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 08 | Aug 2019
p-ISSN: 2395-0072
www.irjet.net
Low-Cost Highway-Rail Intersection Active Warning System (HRI System) - This system provides active advanced warning
in addition to traditional flashers at the crossings. A typical crossing includes four sub-systems, one on each cross-buck (Master
and Slave) and one on each advance warning sign.
EV-Alert - In Australia, an example of a system used by the sugar industry at RLX in Queensland is called the EV-Alert. A radio
transmitting device is fitted to all locomotives, and constantly sends out a coded signal.
Minnesota In-Vehicle Warning - In this Minnesota project, the system used wireless vehicle and roadside communication
antennas that could be built into the familiar cross buck, “RXR” sign and front vehicle license plate. The trackside unit picked up
a signal from the railroad’s train detection electronics and transmitted that signal to antenna-signs.
7. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
a) Percentage of Accident
Level crossing accidents include a small but growing proportion of all railway accidents in India In the last year for which
data were available (1990-2016) the total number of railway accidents in India and the number of recorded accidents at level
crossings are given in table. The trends in level crossings as a proportion of all railway accidents are shown in Table 1.
Level crossing accidents include a small but growing proportion of all railway accidents in India In the last year for which
data were available (1990-2016) the total number of railway accidents in India and the number of recorded accidents at level
crossings are given in table. The trend in level crossings as a proportion of all railway accidents is shown in Table 1.
Table - 1:
Significance Of and Trend In Level Crossing Accidents in India
Year
Total railway accidents (No)
Accidents at level crossing (No)
Level crossing accident %
1990
532
36
6.77
1991
530
47
8.87
1992
524
51
9.73
1993
520
66
12.69
1994
501
73
14.57
1995
398
68
17.09
1996
381
65
17.06
1997
396
66
16.67
1998
397
67
16.88
1999
463
93
20.09
2000
473
84
17.76
2001
415
88
21.2
2002
351
96
27.35
2003
325
95
29.23
2004
234
70
29.91
2005
234
75
32.05
2006
195
79
40.51
Year
Total railway accidents (No)
Accidents at level crossing (No)
Level crossing accident %
2007
194
77
39.69
2008
177
69
38.98
2009
165
70
42.42
|
ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal
© 2019, IRJET
|
Impact Factor value: 7.34
|
Page 1338
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)
e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 08 | Aug 2019
p-ISSN: 2395-0072
www.irjet.net
2010
141
53
37.59
2011
131
61
46.56
2012
121
58
47.93
2013
117
59
50.43
2014
135
56
41.48
2015
107
35
32.71
2016
90
16
17.78
Chart - 1: Level Crossing Accidents in India, By Type of Crossing
Nearly two-thirds of the total number of crossings unmanned level crossings and this proportion has been increased over the
past decade as is shown in chart 1. Total no of accident are more 1990 & its decreases in early years but, in level crossing
accident continuously increases up to 2016 as per the figure.
b) Percentage of fatalities
In 2000-2001, fatalities in level crossing accidents, all fatalities in railway accidents in India, as shown in Table 2. Although
the share of level crossings deaths in all railway facilities declined significantly in the following year (2013-014), over the
decade it has shown a rising trend which is Explained in part by increasing train speeds and in part by increasing motorization
of rural communities.
Table - 2:
Year
Significance Of and Trend in Level Crossing Injuries in India
Number of Passengers
Total Casualties per million passengers carried
Killed
Injured
2000-01
55
286
0.01
2001-02
144
595
0.02
2002-03
157
658
0.03
2003-04
135
302
0.03
2004-05
50
191
0.04
2005-06
315
627
0.165
2006-07
208
402
0.098
2007-08
191
412
0.092
© 2019, IRJET
|
Impact Factor value: 7.34
|
ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal
|
Page 1339
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)
e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 08 | Aug 2019
p-ISSN: 2395-0072
www.irjet.net
2008-09
209
444
0.094
2009-10
238
397
0.088
2010-11
235
358
0.078
2011-12
100
586
0.083
2012-13
60
270
0.039
2013-14
42
94
0.02
2014-15
118
340
0.05
2015-16
40
126
0.02
2017-18
156
289
0
Chart - 2:
Significance Of and Trend In Level Crossing Injuries in India
Figure shows the significance & trend in crossing injuries in India, in which total no of killed and injured passenger per year.
The highest injured in 2002-03 & lowest in 2013-14.Killed passenger are heights in 2005-06 & its decreases now a day.
c) Hazard Index of Crossings
Table shows the Hazard index of crossing year wise 2002 to 2013 ,in which hazard index of crossing calculated by
multiplying Average annual daily traffic, Average annual daily train traffic & Pf factor. The highest hazard index at 2013 is
1244346 & lowest hazard index at 2002 is 706550.
Table - 3:
Hazard index of crossing
Average annual
daily traffic
Average
annual daily
train traffic
Tf
Hazard index
of crossing
63122
13618.6
172.937
0.3
706550
5112361
63221
14006.5
173.208
0.3
727811
2004
5377937
63465
14734.1
173.877
0.3
768574
4
2005
5724516
63332
15683.6
173.512
0.3
816390
5
2006
6218881
63327
17038
173.499
0.3
886822
6
2007
6524377
63273
17875
173.351
0.3
929593
7
2008
6920369
64015
18959.9
175.384
0.3
997577
Sr.No
Item
Annual traffic
Annual
traffic
1
2002
4970803
2
2003
3
© 2019, IRJET
|
Impact Factor value: 7.34
|
train
ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal
|
Page 1340
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)
e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 08 | Aug 2019
p-ISSN: 2395-0072
www.irjet.net
8
2009
7245805
63974
19851.5
175.271
0.3
1043820
9
2010
7651090
64460
20961.9
176.603
0.3
1110578
10
2011
8224384
64600
22532.6
176.986
0.3
1196386
11
2012
8420659
65436
23070.3
179.277
0.3
1240790
12
2013
8397057
65808
23005.6
180.296
0.3
1244346
Chart - 3:
Index Of Crossing
Figure shows the Hazard index of crossing, in which per year hazard crossing is given, the highest hazard index at 2013 is
1244346 & lowest hazard index at 2002 is 706550.
8. CONCLUSIONS
Safety is accorded the highest priority by Indian Railways and all possible steps are undertaken on a continual basis including
up gradation of technology to prevent accidents and to enhance safety.

Level crossing accident in India in recent year is more percentage as compared to past record, so advance protection
system to be used for safety.

Level crossing injuries in India the rate of crossing injuries are less now a day

Hazard index of crossing are continuously increase per year therefore more safety required for it.

Expected no of accident or no of crashes increasing rate per year more so present & advance protection system use for
decreeing the rate of accident.

Initial crash prediction is increases high in last few years.

Alternative system, the Enhanced safety gives more safety there for RLX protection systems are used in Indian railway.
REFERENCES
[1]
Alfred E. Fazio, “Relationship between Light Rail Systems Design and System Operations”, J. Transp. Eng., Vol.130, Pp
No.365-377, (2004).
[2]
Attila Borsos, Miklos Gabor % C saba Koren, “Safety Ranking Of Railway Crossings In Hungary”, Transportation Research
Procedia, Vol.14, Pp No.2111 – 2120, ( 2016 )
© 2019, IRJET
|
Impact Factor value: 7.34
|
ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal
|
Page 1341
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)
e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 08 | Aug 2019
p-ISSN: 2395-0072
www.irjet.net
[3]
Boban Djordjevi, Evelin Krmac & Tomislav Josip Mlinari, “Non-radial DEA model: A new approach to evaluation of safety at
railway level crossings”, Safety Science, Vol. 103, Pp No.234–246, (2017).
[4]
Chen-Yu Chang and Hui-Yu Chou, “Transaction-Cost Approach to the Comparative Analysis of User-Pay and GovernmentPay Public-Private Partnership Systems”, J. Constr. Eng. Manage, (2014).
[5]
Goran Cirovic & Dragan Pamucar, “Decision Support Model For Prioritizing Railway Level Crossings For Safety
Improvements: Application Of The Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy System”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 40, Pp No.2208–
2223, (2013).
[6]
Grégoire S. Larue, Andry Rakotonirainy, et. al., “Assessing Driver Acceptance of Intelligent Transport Systems in the
Context of Railway Level Crossing”, Transportation Research, Vol.30, Pp No.1–13, (2015).
[7]
Han Zhang, Gregory A. Keoleian and Michael D. Lepech, “Network-Level Pavement Asset Management System Integrated
with Life-Cycle Analysis and Life-Cycle Optimization”, J. Infrastruct. Syst., Vol.19, Pp No.99-107, (2013).
[8]
Hua Jiang and Mi G. Chorzepa, “Case Study: Evaluation of a Floating Steel Fender System for Bridge Pier Protection against
Vessel Collision”, J. Bridge Eng, (2016).
[9]
J. Powderham and G. J. Tamaro, “Mansion House London: Risk Assessment and Protection”, J. Constr. Eng. Manage., Vol.121,
Pp No.266-272, (1995).
[10]
Jinyun Zhao, Bo Wang, et.al, “Analysis of some problems in design of Corrosion Protection for Long-distance Pipeline”,
ICPTT, (2013).
[11]
Luis Filipe Caetano and Paulo Fonseca Teixeira, “Strategic Model to Optimize Railway-Track Renewal Operations at a
Network Level”, J. Infrastruct. Syst. (2016).
[12]
Victoria Gitelman, A. Shalom Hakkert, et.al., “Screening Tools for Considering Grade Separation at Rail-Highway Crossings”,
J. Transp. Eng., Vol.132, Pp No. 52-59, (2006).
[13]
Yeboah Gyasi-Agyei, “Cost-Effective Temporary Micro Irrigation System for Grass Establishment on Environmentally
Sensitive Steep Slopes”, J. Irrig. Drain Eng., Vol.130, Pp No.218-226, (2004).
© 2019, IRJET
|
Impact Factor value: 7.34
|
ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal
|
Page 1342